WaW: Shermans in S&P 62

[Agis]

Hi again,

please check the latest S&P. Link: http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/pdf/sp62.pdf
Some of you may remember some heated discussions about Sherman movement rates and stats. :wink:

I have written a serious "overhaul" of the Sherman stats.
S&P 62 covers 12+ versions of almost every Sherman in British and US use plus a huge bunch of options. :!:

These versions are unofficial at the moment, but Matt and I are eagerly awaiting your comments.
If you like them they may become the new official Shermans.

So read them, test them and give us feedback!

 

[DoomOnYou72]

Thanks for the work Agis these look good. We will give them a try next game we play. The only disagreement I have is that the movement rate of the Sherman should be standardized at 4". Even in the article you have disparities using the same chasis (see the firefly). All the sources I have seen list the Shermans (all varients except Jumbo) list the speeds from 36Kmh to 42Kmh.

 

[Agis]

I have taken great care especially on the speed value.
IMO there are bigger differences.
Check just this one example website of the many sources I consulted: http://afvdb.50megs.com/usa/m4sherman.html

The sustained speed differs from 32 to 42 km/h, Certainly a difference that justifies different speed values in WaW.

And with that much options you can certainly choose the one Sherman variant that fits your needs :wink: most!

 

[Troll66]

thanks for the sherman update stuff - very handy - any other updates planned?

 

[Agis]

thanks for the sherman update stuff - very handy - any other updates planned?

Watch out for my Vehicle Compendiums!
As soon as the Logo License is officially release I will publish the German Vehicle Compendium, the Battlefield Evolution: World at War supplement covering over 80 additional or updated vehicles for your German forces.
Even all necessary unit cards are included.
Hot on the heals the Soviet book is following.

Depending on the success of these the British and US books are planned.

 

[Troll66]

That sounds good stuff tome
thanks and good luck

 

[rvrratt]

They look good, but the speed still bothers me. I also am not sure if the points were not lowered enough and what I mean is American Tank to German tank ratio. I know that sounds generic as it all depends on tne tanks but gameplay wise it's been impossible to beat the German tanks with the American tanks. That's just our experience, so I don't want to speak for everyone. I plan on taking these news stats for a "road test" and I will comment further then. Thank you for addressing the "sherman" problem! :wink:

 

[pelarel]

Agis - following on from rvrratt's comment, the only way to take on German 'big cats' is to outnumber them (as my cromwells found out his evening ( ) given that the 'standard' mediums of the allies are so cheap (shermans, cromwells, T34/76 and for the germans - the PzIV) why not allow all of these to have up to three tanks in a single asset slot? (as you have with the Sherman 105's in your S&P lists)

cheers

chris

 

[Agis]

snip - why not allow all of these to have up to three tanks in a single asset slot? (as you have with the Sherman 105's in your S&P lists)

Absolutely an option. The downside is that the game can easily degenerate in a "tank-fest".
I draw the line for multiple tanks per asset slot at around 150 points per vehicle.

Another way are pure Armoured Fighting Vehicle Forces. In the upcoming German vehicle compendium I give this option.
BUT - I highly recommend using the following limitations when fielding an Armoured Fighting Vehicle Force in World at War:
• Only use an Armoured Fighting Vehicle Force vs. another Armoured Fighting Vehicle Force
OR
• Use an Armoured Fighting Vehicle Force vs. any “normal” World at War list with the permission of your opponent.

 

[SgtHulka]

I'm a little concerned by the 9+ to hit number. This makes the Sherman immune to aircraft cannon. Was this a reaction to the German Flakpanzer? Shall all tanks gain +1 to their to hit number and armor saves to compensate?

I don't know, compared to the Russian T-34, I feel like the new Sherman-based tanks (especially the Firefly) are unrealistically superior, especially when you factor in their points value.

 

[Agis]

I'm a little concerned by the 9+ to hit number. This makes the Sherman immune to aircraft cannon. Was this a reaction to the German Flakpanzer? Shall all tanks gain +1 to their to hit number and armor saves to compensate?

Not at all! The better to hit value came up after carefully reevaluating the available informations.
And please keep in mind that the to hit is not all, look at the saves and kill numbers also...

I don't know, compared to the Russian T-34, I feel like the new Sherman-based tanks (especially the Firefly) are unrealistically superior, especially when you factor in their points value.

Here I have to disagree strongly. IMO the pointvalues are still valid.
Just compare the T34/85 of the WaW book with the Firefly - more or less on par IMO. Consider also the ability to take tank riders, better saves and speed of the T-34s.

Please try them out before judging...

 

[SgtHulka]

I don't know, compared to the Russian T-34, I feel like the new Sherman-based tanks (especially the Firefly) are unrealistically superior, especially when you factor in their points value.

Here I have to disagree strongly. IMO the pointvalues are still valid.
Just compare the T34/85 of the WaW book with the Firefly - more or less on par IMO. Consider also the ability to take tank riders, better saves and speed of the T-34s.

Please try them out before judging...

If you say so. I'm not good with statistics but just looking at the numbers I'd rather have a Firefly than a T-34/85. I'd rather have Soviet Engineers than British ones, though, and I'd rather have a 76mm field gun than a 6-pounder, so maybe it all comes out in the wash.

I do like that you can now easily take 4 Shermans in a U.S. Armored Infantry platoon.

 

[pelarel]

snip - why not allow all of these to have up to three tanks in a single asset slot? (as you have with the Sherman 105's in your S&P lists)

Absolutely an option. The downside is that the game can easily degenerate in a "tank-fest".
I draw the line for multiple tanks per asset slot at around 150 points per vehicle.

Another way are pure Armoured Fighting Vehicle Forces. In the upcoming German vehicle compendium I give this option.
BUT - I highly recommend using the following limitations when fielding an Armoured Fighting Vehicle Force in World at War:
• Only use an Armoured Fighting Vehicle Force vs. another Armoured Fighting Vehicle Force
OR
• Use an Armoured Fighting Vehicle Force vs. any “normal” World at War list with the permission of your opponent.

Or, if someone does take a 'unit' of tanks they must take the Attack strategy. This will always(except when their opponent is also attack) allow their opponent to choose board edge and deployment zones to counter the massed armour. at least with the 150 pts limit the units are going to be 'weaker' of the medium tanks

and/or (after further mulling!) limit the "units" of tanks to one per company?

 

[Rabidchild]

I've toyed with the idea of making tank squadron limitations based on their points. As it stands the army creation rules favor the higher points tanks.

Most armies have 3 armor slots, but if the German player can fill theirs with 3 Tiger IIs and the best you have are Sherman Jumbos, they have the advantage of concentration of force. Granted the other player will have more points elsewhere if the game is even, but as it stands in the main rulebook, for most armies the best tank killers are other tanks.

So my thought was this:
Up to 450pts may be spent per Armor slot. Any tanks purchased as one slot are a squadron, choose a Squad Leader before the game starts. Any tanks that cost more than 450pts take up one Armor slot per 450pts or part thereof.

Still want to field the Tiger II? Sure, but it takes 2 armor slots to do it and it can have up to a Panther as a pal. Meanwhile the other player can have a boatload of Shermans as they can pack multiples in each Armor slot. The main point is that it balances the armor on the table, since armor tends to dominate.

I've playtested this and so long as the cheaper tanks are in squadrons, it doesn't slow the game down one bit since each player will either have 3 tanks or 3 groups of tanks that act together.

Thoughts?

 

[pelarel]

@ Rabidchild

sounds good, will give it a go in the next couple of games and get back

 

[Agis]

I am all for Rabidchilds idea!

 

[SgtHulka]

Most armies have 3 armor slots, but if the German player can fill theirs with 3 Tiger IIs and the best you have are Sherman Jumbos, they have the advantage of concentration of force.

I must be playing wrong. Tigers are upwards of six-hundred points. For three of them you need over 1800 points, probably closer to two-thousand to fill your necessary infantry slots.

I had thought that once you're in excess of 1500 points you have access to a whole new platoon. So an ally could actually have six tank slots (eight for U.S. Armored Infantry) in order to take on those Tigers. Do you only get a new platoon for a full 1500 points, i.e. 3,000 points?

 

[Rabidchild]

You may take one platoon for every 1,500 points in your force.

Thanks for pointing this out SgtHulka, if you had a question about it I'm sure other people did as well. The armylists say for every 1500 points you may have another platoon, not part of 1500 points. So 1500 = 1 platoon, 2000 = 1 platoon, 2999 = 1 platoon. 3000 = 2 platoons

@Agis: Thanks for the support!

@pelarel: Great! Post here or send me a PM with your results.

 

[pelarel]

I thought i'd read something similar as far as force sizes go but couldn't find it on the forum again - I've been playing 2000pt platoons, it gives a good size game that's over in less than 2hrs - even when teaching the game!

 

[Wolfhound]

Up to 450pts may be spent per Armor slot. Any tanks purchased as one slot are a squadron, choose a Squad Leader before the game starts. Any tanks that cost more than 450pts take up one Armor slot per 450pts or part thereof.

That's all kinds of awesome.